It always bothered me in the way Gowling emphasized they do not work for us opt-ins from the start and yet we have exposed perhaps as many shares to their control as do the "committee'. They say emphatically that they do not answer to us and hence don't bother asking any questions. But a fair question to me is "How many shares have opt-in committed?"  I"m sure the "committee" have been told. I would like to know the number. No need to keep it secret at this stage. This would give us some idea what our potential payout might be if Gowling succeeds on our behalf to increase our percentage of distribution.

Has anyone here ever received a direct answer from questions relating to our participation except to be told "We do not work for you."

Having reached this stage in the proceedings is there a cut off lockedin/lockedout where you can't cancel your opt-in anymore and no one else can become an opt-in participant?  If for example before  the beginning stages of disbursement opt-outs find they are excluded from a greater percentage and then  say "Hey -I want in now" can they do so?  This new list of opt-ins at the last minute would dilute our take home pay but increase Gowling's. Would they accept these new opt-ins?  (They have a rule that says they do not have to accept anybody's nor everybody's share offered as an opt-in - seems like if they don't like you they can cut you out)

On the other hand, suppose we find out we will not get special attention of an exclusive greater percentage, can we send a letter saying we want out of the opt-in group?  Does it work both ways?  There has to be a lock down at some point.

Gowling should voluntarily come out with something to us opt-ins soon. No ponit in me writing them a letter about my qustions because I would get the same response "We don't work for you and don't have to answer to you".

We are talking in the millions of dollars and our millions of opt-in shares and we should be respected for our risk.